Justin said:
- The world is less dangerous than in past decades. You're relying on a golden era of the past to justify your fear of today. This is incorrect. The world is stable (as a whole), we have advances in medicine and technology, etc.
the western world is, yeah. africa, south america and the middle east dont know what the world stable means. look at their governments and economy. if they were so stable do you think the genocides going on in all these places would be taking place? do u think the AIDS epidemic would be killing Africa as we know it? do you think their standard of living would be so low?
Terrorism isn't something that you can really fight.
so we shouldnt try? we should sit back and let them at it?
oh, no, so we should wage war on all our borders, forgetting the horrible plight of our arab inhabitants. i see.
It is on its guard, yet it always suffers suicide bombings and attacks.
thats because its inhabited by people calling themselves the chosen ones. they were handed a strip of land in the middle of a region who hates them. THATS why they are attacked.
A similar analogy is house burglary. If a robber wants to get in, they will.
yeah, and you can meet him at the door with a baseball bat.
You sitting in your house in Australia, being worried, is pointless. Speaking of Israel, a Jewish proverb says "worrying never solved anything".
im not sitting here worrying, im advocating active preventive measures.
And there wasn't one before it? (on the scale of 9/11 which was a freak event)
point of this? im not following you.
There always have been. You sitting there worrying isn't going to change anything, and invading the country and overturning it isn't going to do anything... As seen in Iraq. Also, communist regimes in soviet russia were considered extremist and bad, years ago, which they were, but the people survived and it toppled in time. You need to target the hegemony of the nation itself, so that it can change it self. You can't expect to use heavy handed bombing tactics to cause change because the people will resist.
when have they ever, apart from now (meaning the latter half of this century) ever been as prominent or aggressive as the ones we saw in place recently? plus, when in history have they had access to weapons that could kill millions of people?
That's said because it creates a great news headline.
also because its a) true and b) something people need to know. we dont all want to sit in the "ignorance is bliss" bubble you seem to inhabit.
You, sitting behind your computer in Australia, dont need to be concerned about something that will never affect you.
rofl if a nuclear bomb dropped on australia, pretty sure you would want to be concerned about it, pal.
It's a big bad world isn't it?
yeah, tis.
Do you walk down the street, always scared that you will be robbed?
no, i live in the shire, i dont suffer that problem.
That's relying on perimeter defence. Bali, UK, Spain all occured after 9/11 when people knew of the risks and were on guard. Also, bombings in Iraq would mean that everyone on that country, as human instinct, would be on guard, yet they still occur daily
WE ARE A FUCKING ISLAND. perimeter defence is all we can rely on you idiot!
Being on guard is a tedious activity, which is prone to failure.
lmao well theres the fundamental difference between you and me. i believe the safety of this country is worth this "tedious activity" and until it "fails" in the case of Australia, your rhetoric is lost on me.
